LANGUAGE AND THE WEB.

NPR’s “Talk of the Nation” today features a conversation between Grant Barrett, Geoffrey Pullum, and Martha Barnette on “new words, new blogs and new usage”; if you’ve got a spare half-hour, it’s a real pleasure. Grant and Geoff are two of my favorite wordanistas, and it’s great to hear them provide genuinely informed discussion of topics usually gnawed endlessly by cliche-ridden ignoramuses (and it was a particular thrill to hear Geoff’s peculiar accent, the result of a remarkably checkered career: born in Irvine, Scotland; moved to West Wickham, in Kent, while still very young; moved to London; joined a rock band and worked in Germany in nightclub residencies and on American air bases; went to college in York; moved to the States…). I particularly liked the sympathetic and friendly way they dealt with a young woman who called in to complain about people who write till for until and thru for through (yes, they explained that till is the older form). Here‘s a link to the show’s webpage; click on Listen (you’ll get a choice between RealAudio and WindowsMedia) and enjoy it. (Via Wordorigins.org.)

Comments

Dr. Pullum’s explanation of until differs significantly from the OED’s, though; he gives it as starting around 1400, while the OED gives a quote from c1200, and he associates it with on till, while the OED associates it with and till. (This doesn’t really change the thrust of his argument, but unless the OED entry is inaccurate, I rather feel he should have stuck to facts he was sure of.)

My OED has und + till, with the und Old Norse and not occurring on its own in English, where it’s already whole untill. Not and. Am I missing something? Also, unto is from until, from the time when to and til were still interfering because of Norse influences.
Synchronic etymological arguments are really a bit disingenuous, aren’t they? Derivation tells you only a little about how a word is (or “should be”) used. But history is needed to deflate the argument that something is a recent, corrupt form. Plus, it’s tempting because those who are seduced by prescriptivists are often persuaded by etymology.
All dictionaries of even moderate size do seem to have a standout paragraph that says exactly what needs to be said, namely that till is older than until, not the other way around; and that ’till is “nonstandard”, which is as close as they get to “wrong”.

And you can support my book habit without even spending money on me by following my Amazon links to do your shopping (if, of course, you like shopping on Amazon); I get a small percentage of every dollar spent while someone is following my referral links, and every month I get a gift certificate that allows me to buy a few books (or, if someone has bought a big-ticket item, even more). You will not only get your purchases, you will get my blessings and a karmic boost!

Favorite rave review, by Teju Cole:
"Evidence that the internet is not as idiotic as it often looks. This site is called Language Hat and it deals with many issues of a linguistic flavor. It's a beacon of attentiveness and crisp thinking, and an excellent substitute for the daily news."

From "commonbeauty"

(Cole's blog circa 2003)

All comments are copyright their original posters. Only messages signed "languagehat" are property of and attributable to languagehat.com. All other messages and opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily state or reflect those of languagehat.com. Languagehat.com does not endorse any potential defamatory opinions of readers, and readers should post opinions regarding third parties at their own risk. Languagehat.com reserves the right to alter or delete any questionable material posted on this site.